Americans United - Missouri Right to Pray amendmenthttps://au.org/tags/missouri-right-to-pray-amendment
enMistake In Missouri: Appeals Court Upholds Misleading Ballot Summary Of Prayer Amendment https://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/mistake-in-missouri-appeals-court-upholds-misleading-ballot-summary-of
<a href="/about/people/simon-brown">Simon Brown</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Religious freedom is already protected in Missouri, so the amendment is redundant at best and a threat to individual freedom at worst.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Whenever state lawmakers come up with a ballot initiative that undermines church-state separation, they often try to trick people into voting for it.</p><p>That was certainly the case in Florida, where last year Americans United and our allies <a href="http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/florida-judge-says-ballot-initiative-on-religion-is-misleading-and-must-be">successfully fought</a> some misleading language in the ballot summary of an amendment that would remove church-state safeguards from the Florida constitution. (Although a judge found the ballot summary misleading, Florida's attorney general revised the language and a court approved it. Amendment 8 is thus still on the November ballot and remains problematic.)</p><p>It’s the case in Missouri, too, but a state appeals court there just <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/missouri/appeals-court-upholds-mo-prayer-ballot-measure/article_05e781e8-fbe1-50f2-bfa2-58bfce45caca.html?mode=story">upheld the summary</a> for the so-called “Right to Pray" Amendment, which voters face in August. This is a very disappointing decision, because the summary is extremely misleading.</p><p>The <a href="http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2012ballot/">paragraph</a> that outlines the proposal for voters makes it seem as though Amendment 2 would merely protect the right of citizens to express their religious beliefs, guarantee the right of school children to pray and acknowledge God and require public schools to display the Bill of Rights.</p><p>In reality, the language is <a href="http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills111/biltxt/perf/HJR0002P.htm">so broad</a> that no one knows what all of the consequences will be if it’s approved. We do know that it opens the door for coercive prayer and proselytizing in public schools, allows students to skip homework if it offends their religious beliefs and infringes on the religious liberty rights of prisoners. </p><p>For example, one provision of Amendment 2 mandates that the state “shall ensure that any person shall have the right to pray individually or corporately in a private or public setting so long as such prayer does not result in disturbance of the peace or disruption of a public meeting or assembly.”</p><p>Does it mean that all governmental meetings will feature group invocations or benedictions? What if one person’s “right to pray” intrudes on another person’s right to abstain from praying or to pray according to the tenets of her own faith? And what constitutes a disturbance or disruption?</p><p>No one knows the answers to any of those questions.</p><p>And yet, a panel of the Missouri Court of Appeals' Western District <a href="http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2012/06/appeals-court-upholds-missouri-ballot.html">rejected arguments</a> that the ballot description for Amendment 2 is misleading.</p><p>It seems even the court doesn’t yet understand the full implications of the scheme. If the measure passes, however, courts are going to have to iron out the details. That means the state should be prepared for long and costly lawsuits, all at taxpayer expense.</p><p>Religious freedom is already protected in Missouri, so the amendment is redundant at best and a threat to individual freedom at worst.</p><p>If you live in the Show-Me State, make sure your neighbors do their homework before they vote.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/creationism-evolution">Creationism &amp; Evolution</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/school-prayer">School Prayer</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/prayer-at-government-events-and-legislative-meetings">Prayer at Government Events and Legislative Meetings</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/missouri-right-to-pray-amendment">Missouri Right to Pray amendment</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Location:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/our-work/grassroots/missouri">Missouri</a></span></div></div>Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:28:24 +0000Simon Brown7239 at https://au.orghttps://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/mistake-in-missouri-appeals-court-upholds-misleading-ballot-summary-of#comments